Recommendations & Conclusions
8 items
4
Recommendation
57th Report - Government services: Gene…
Accepted in Part
Charging bodies do not publish adequate or consistent information on their fees and charges to allow for effective public scrutiny and accountability. The Treasury sets out in both Managing Public Money (MPM) and the Financial Reporting Manual (FReM) the information departments must disclose on fees and charges in their annual …
Read more
Charging bodies do not publish adequate or consistent information on their fees and charges to allow for effective public scrutiny and accountability. The Treasury sets out in both Managing Public Money (MPM) and the Financial Reporting Manual (FReM) the information departments must disclose on fees and charges in their annual report and accounts. However, inconsistencies between these documents creates ambiguity about what needs to be reported and the required level of detail. Partly as a result, none of the case study bodies fully met the Treasury’s disclosure requirements in 2023–24. The information in department annual reports is not sufficient for users to understand what they are being charged for; for instance cross-subsidising is not always transparent, and the aims of charges are often unclear. The presentation, depth and metrics disclosed by charging bodies vary considerably, limiting comparison and understanding for the public, the Treasury, and Parliament. recommendation The Treasury should set, by March 2026 in time for the next financial year, proportionate and standardised reporting requirements for fee-charging public bodies. These requirements must enable effective public and Parliamentary scrutiny by ensuring at a minimum that each body publishes: • how fees are calculated; 5 • the cost-recovery targets and actual performance with an explanation of any variance; • and the breakdown of costs included in fees, clearly identifying any cross-subsidies or costs included to support other areas of government.
Show less
Government response AI summary
The government disagrees with the specific recommendation for standardised reporting but commits to updating the Financial Reporting Manual (FReM) by Spring 2026 with clearer reporting guidance for fee-charging public bodies. They will also consider if further reporting requirements are necessary.
Read full response →
HM Treasury
9
Recommendation
57th Report - Government services: Gene…
Accepted in Part
The NAO reported that of the seven services examined, six aimed to achieve 100% cost-recovery, but these six averaged only 88% recovery in 2023-24, leading to a shortfall of £340 million.16 The Treasury acknowledged that it has perhaps been too passive, relying primarily on accounting officers. Treasury accepted that it …
Read more
The NAO reported that of the seven services examined, six aimed to achieve 100% cost-recovery, but these six averaged only 88% recovery in 2023-24, leading to a shortfall of £340 million.16 The Treasury acknowledged that it has perhaps been too passive, relying primarily on accounting officers. Treasury accepted that it now needs to adopt a more systematic approach to monitoring, assessing and supporting departments in setting fees and charges. The Treasury told us it plans to improve regular assessment, transparency, efficiency and sharing best practice.17
Show less
Government response AI summary
The government disagrees with the specific recommendation. However, the Treasury will update the Financial Reporting Manual (FReM) to align to 6.11 of Managing Public Money (MPM) to include clearer reporting guidance for fee-charging public bodies and will embed oversight through the Spending Review (SR) returns …
Read full response →
HM Treasury
13
Conclusion
57th Report - Government services: Gene…
Accepted in Part
The Treasury told us it manages its fees and charges through periodic spending reviews (typically every two years) and expects accounting officers to follow its guidance. The Treasury described the spending review as a mechanism for departments to assess their cost base and funding needs, including their approach to fees …
Read more
The Treasury told us it manages its fees and charges through periodic spending reviews (typically every two years) and expects accounting officers to follow its guidance. The Treasury described the spending review as a mechanism for departments to assess their cost base and funding needs, including their approach to fees and charges.24 MPM requires that where ministers decide to charge less than full cost, there should be an agreed plan to achieve full cost recovery within a reasonable period, with Treasury consent.25 This principle has not been complied with or 19 Qq 60-65 20 C&AG’s Report, para 2.25 21 Qq 51-53, 55 22 C&AG’s Report, para 2.25 23 Qq 67-69 24 Qq 26,28 61-63 25 HM Treasury, Managing Public Money, June 2025 10 monitored effectively. The Treasury told us that, where bodies are under or over-charging, it will review whether they are doing that by design and with required consent, and that it will examine the implication of this.26 26 Qq 8, 40 11 2 Supporting effective financial management Streamlining the process to amend fees
Show less
Government response AI summary
The government disagrees with the recommendation but will update the Financial Reporting Manual (FReM) to align to Managing Public Money (MPM) to include clearer reporting guidance for fee-charging public bodies and embed oversight through the Spending Review returns every two years.
Read full response →
HM Treasury
18
Recommendation
57th Report - Government services: Gene…
Accepted in Part
The Treasury requires departments to disclose information on their fees and charges in their annual reports and accounts, as set out in MPM and the Financial Reporting Manual (FreM). However, the Treasury noted there are inconsistencies between these documents. This has created ambiguity about what departments must report and at …
Read more
The Treasury requires departments to disclose information on their fees and charges in their annual reports and accounts, as set out in MPM and the Financial Reporting Manual (FreM). However, the Treasury noted there are inconsistencies between these documents. This has created ambiguity about what departments must report and at what level of detail. The NAO found that disclosures vary significantly across charging bodies, for example, with some omitting key details such as cross-subsidies. We asked the Treasury what it is doing to improve oversight and strengthen disclosure requirements. The Treasury told us it plans to align MPM with the FReM and clarify expectations around departmental reporting.36
Show less
Government response AI summary
The Treasury will update the Financial Reporting Manual (FReM) to align to 6.11 of Managing Public Money (MPM) by Spring 2026 to include clearer reporting guidance for fee-charging public bodies. They will also keep this under review and consider if this will be sufficient or …
Read full response →
HM Treasury
19
Recommendation
57th Report - Government services: Gene…
Accepted in Part
Poor reporting limits the Treasury and Parliament’s ability to monitor fees and hold departments to account. The NAO found that none of the seven services it examined complied fully with all of the Treasury’s disclosure requirements in their respective 2023-24 annual report and accounts.37 Accounting officers are responsible for ensuring …
Read more
Poor reporting limits the Treasury and Parliament’s ability to monitor fees and hold departments to account. The NAO found that none of the seven services it examined complied fully with all of the Treasury’s disclosure requirements in their respective 2023-24 annual report and accounts.37 Accounting officers are responsible for ensuring fees are appropriately set and transparently reported, yet incomplete and inconsistent disclosures mean there is no clear picture of fee-setting across government. This weakens scrutiny and allows significant surpluses or deficits 32 Qq 11,28 33 Q 43 34 Letter from HM Treasury’s Permanent Secretary, 24 November 2025 35 Qq 11-15 36 Qq 28, 29; C&AG’s Report, Figure 13 37 C&AG’s Report, para 2.27 13 to build up before corrective action is taken. The Treasury told us that greater consistency and standardisation in reporting will help improve its understanding of departmental performance and better support accounting officers in fulfilling their responsibilities.38
Show less
Government response AI summary
The Treasury will update the Financial Reporting Manual (FReM) to align to 6.11 of Managing Public Money (MPM) by Spring 2026 to include clearer reporting guidance for fee-charging public bodies. They will also keep this under review and consider if this will be sufficient or …
Read full response →
HM Treasury
3
Recommendation
58th Report - Government services: Iden…
Accepted in Part
Legacy IT systems are a significant contributory factor in the cost of government services and an impediment to being able to gather better data to bring about improvements. Departments face major challenges in collecting and analysing cost data due to legacy IT systems and siloed data structures. These outdated systems …
Read more
Legacy IT systems are a significant contributory factor in the cost of government services and an impediment to being able to gather better data to bring about improvements. Departments face major challenges in collecting and analysing cost data due to legacy IT systems and siloed data structures. These outdated systems are a significant cost driver, requiring additional people and processes to work around system limitations, and hinder consistent data gathering. The Cabinet Office recognises the need for Permanent Secretaries to understand their legacy estate, while DSIT has baselined government legacy systems and reviewed departmental bids for funding in the 2025 Spending Review. However, quick wins often mask deeper issues like poor data quality and entrenched cultural barriers. The lack of common data standards across government complicates benchmarking and granular cost analysis. The Shared Services strategy offers potential for improved consistency in the future, but technical solutions alone are insufficient–cultural and process reforms will be constantly needed. There is no standard policy on time recording in the civil service, and despite ERP systems offering 4 this capability, its use remains optional. The desired levels of productivity improvements will not be achieved without effective use of time for every civil servant as would be the norm in the private sector. A shift in mindset is needed to better understand how time is spent and to make use of data for meaningful insights. recommendation a. DSIT should provide the Committee with a baselined list of legacy systems identified and the services they support alongside the Treasury Minute response to this report. b. In addition, DSIT should,within six months from the publication of this report, indicate which legacy systems should be targeted as a priority for further investigation into how far their limitations result in additional people and process costs in the operational business areas they support
Show less
Government response AI summary
The government accepts part of the recommendation, agreeing to share available legacy system data with the Committee chair by March 2026 (privately). However, it rejects the second part, stating it will not prioritize identifying specific systems for further cost investigation within six months, as it …
Read full response →
HM Treasury
13
Recommendation
58th Report - Government services: Iden…
Accepted in Part
Legacy systems are problematic for two main reasons. Firstly, they are a significant driver of cost, comprising around one-third of government’s technology estate but representing almost half of its costs.30 This may not include the excess costs that arise from people having to work manually around cumbersome, old systems and …
Read more
Legacy systems are problematic for two main reasons. Firstly, they are a significant driver of cost, comprising around one-third of government’s technology estate but representing almost half of its costs.30 This may not include the excess costs that arise from people having to work manually around cumbersome, old systems and poor-quality data from fragmented data sources.31 Secondly, legacy systems are an impediment to being able to gather better cost data as data extraction often requires manual effort as repeated point-in-time exercises.32 The Cabinet Office recognises the need for Permanent Secretaries to have a good understanding of their legacy systems. The Department for Science, Innovation and Technology (DSIT) has baselined government legacy systems and reviewed departmental bids for funding in the 2025 Spending Review to mitigate the risks such systems pose. It told us that although there has been a step- change in how senior leaders are thinking about their legacy systems, there were not as many bids for funding as expected.33
Show less
Government response AI summary
DSIT will share the available data with the chair of the Committee by March 2026, however, the department does not agree that this recommendation should be an immediate priority of the next 6 months.
Read full response →
HM Treasury
18
Recommendation
58th Report - Government services: Iden…
Accepted in Part
The SSO role is not well understood across departments compared to other senior roles in departments. Both Cabinet Office and DSIT told us that more can and should be done to raise its profile and ensure that an SSO is appointed for “every single service”.45 It is important to ensure …
Read more
The SSO role is not well understood across departments compared to other senior roles in departments. Both Cabinet Office and DSIT told us that more can and should be done to raise its profile and ensure that an SSO is appointed for “every single service”.45 It is important to ensure that SSOs have the appropriate authority as well as the right skills for the role. The Cabinet Office told us that it has already identified where an SSO is necessary, but ultimately Permanent Secretaries should be responsible for their appointment. The Cabinet Office does not yet have a timeframe for this but has committed to set one out in response to this report.46 Pace and leadership to enable benefits from new technologies
Show less
Government response AI summary
The Government Digital Service and the Cabinet Office will issue a letter encouraging Permanent Secretaries to complete an assessment of all SSO gaps within 6 months, and to appoint SSOs within 12 months, but the implementation target is March 2027, which is longer than the …
Read full response →
HM Treasury